It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
By knowing how to correctly recognize objects that were commonly mistaken for UFOs, investigators could quickly eliminate false reports and focus on identifying those sightings which remained unexplained.
An odd thing happened this past week involving the real CIA, some fictional FBI agents and the oft-disputed truth about this country’s investigation into UFOs.
TextJust three days prior to the long-awaited return of “The X-Files,” the Central Intelligence Agency posted two rather extraordinary items on its official site.
originally posted by: mirageman
Yes for whatever reasons the CIA chose to promote these files (which were not exactly new) to coincide with the launch of the new series of the X-Files earlier this year. A year or so before that they were claiming that the U2 and various other secret aircraft were responsible for UFO stories back in the day.
The hoax claim isn't conclusively proven, but the explanation is credible and it's not entirely speculative with the comments from Striling Allen and professor Etcorn. Lonnie Zamora wasn't in on it, he was a victim, as are people who think he saw something extraterrestrial.
originally posted by: Zcustosmorum
And to my surprise, the Socorro UFO case, unexplained as far as I'm still aware, is up on the website:
A letter from Dr. Linus Pauling located within the Special Collections of Oregon State University (where the Pauling papers are archived) provides insight into the true nature of the Socorro sighting. In a 1968 letter to Dr. Stirling Colgate -the President of New Mexico Tech- Pauling inquires about the Socorro sighting. Colgate replied to Pauling by sending back Pauling's letter with a handwritten notation at the bottom. Dr. Colgate writes: "I have a good indication of the student who engineered the hoax. Student has left. Cheers, Stirling."
This telling letter can be viewed here:...
"As a project, a former student of mine had examined the case in the mid 1980s. Using yearbooks and networking, she began calling alumni who were at Tech in 1964. She somehow located one of the former students believed to have been involved. He would not expand on the hoax or have his name used- but she found out it was a hoax. My memory of her investigation is spotty- it was 25 years ago. But I remember that she found also found out through records that coincidentally a rear projection device was stolen from the campus the day of the UFO sighting."
Etcorn was a noted psychologist. He said that the psychology of these Techies was such that they liked to fool those who they thought were foolish.
We discussed how the pranksters may have incorporated 1) a large helium balloon resting on the desert floor to appear "landed" and then released up into the air on cue. Perhaps it was a reflective white colored balloon or a balloon fitted over with glossy-white craft paper- with added "landing struts" and a red insignia drawn on its side 2) "roaring" or "whining" explosives, pyrotechnics, model rockets, thrown flares or a flame device 3) smaller students dressed in white lab coats acting as the "aliens" and 4) the digging out of "landing depressions" and burning of nearby bushes. Soil or rock in the area may have been "salted" with silicon or trinitite from the school's Geology Lab. And perhaps it was intentional that Zamora was led to the landed craft by a speeding car. One of the students may have purposely engaged Lonnie in a car chase to lure him to where the hoax was staged. Zamora reports that he "broke the chase" to investigate the UFO- just as the students knew that he would.
Though these ideas about how the hoax may have been accomplished are strictly speculative, Dr. Etscorn reminded me of an important fact: Nothing that was reported was beyond the abilities of "smart Techies" to create.
originally posted by: Arbitrageur
To view this source, click on quote, then copy/paste the following link into browser:
As to address the actual accusation of the Socorro case being a hoax, it is flimsy at best in my opinion, especially if you covered the original source material.
In summery our presentation is that this was a non human craft, from who knows where, part of that reasoning because no company anywhere on Earth said it was theirs and would have had to tell either the White House, CIA, FBI or the military when requested to do so.
There is so much information and documentation we uncovered, like what the real symbol was, that our 2 plus hours presentation has to be whittled down to the 60 minutes we are allowed to speak.
Ray has been extremely generous in sharing his data and insights.
Tony and I walked the site in February of 2016, and the hoax theory is not plausible in any way shape or form.